Next Generation Science Standards

Next Generation Science Standards
Name	Next Generation Science Standards
Abbreviation	NGSS
First published	2013
Country	United States

Next Generation Science Standards The Next Generation Science Standards are a multistate effort to create K–12 science standards designed to align with contemporary research on learning and practice in National Research Council, American Association for the Advancement of Science, National Science Teachers Association, and state science agencies. The standards emphasize three-dimensional learning and aim to integrate disciplinary core ideas, science and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts across grades. They have been adopted, adapted, or considered by numerous state education agencies, school districts, and professional societies in the United States.

Overview

The standards articulate grade-band performance expectations influenced by reports such as A Framework for K–12 Science Education from the National Academies Press and guidance from organizations including the National Science Teachers Association, American Association for the Advancement of Science, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, and the National Coalition for Core Arts Standards. They were drafted to bridge K–12 expectations with postsecondary preparation at institutions like Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of California, Berkeley, and Carnegie Mellon University. Advocates have linked the initiative to workforce goals referenced by bodies such as the National Science Foundation, the United States Department of Education, and industry groups like the American Chemical Society. Critics and supporters alike compare the standards to state standards in places such as California, Texas, Florida, New York (state) and refer to examples from international curricula in Finland, Singapore, South Korea, and Japan.

Development and Adoption

The development process began through partnerships among the National Research Council, the National Science Teachers Association, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and state leaders convened by the Council of Chief State School Officers. Drafting incorporated review panels that included representatives from National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, American Educational Research Association, and state school boards such as those in California State Board of Education and Illinois State Board of Education. Adoption decisions were made by state legislatures, governors' offices, and departments like the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and Texas Education Agency. Political debates in statehouses mirrored controversies seen in Scopes Trial–era public discourse and touched interest groups including the Heritage Foundation, National School Boards Association, and teacher unions like the National Education Association.

Structure and Content

The standards are organized by grade bands (K, 1–2, 3–5, 6–8, 9–12) and by disciplinary core ideas in domains associated with organizations such as the American Chemical Society, American Physical Society, Society for Neuroscience, and the Ecological Society of America. Content strands reference topics that appear in curricula at universities such as Harvard University, University of Michigan, and University of Chicago and in assessments influenced by testing consortia like Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium and Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers. The three dimensions—disciplinary core ideas, science and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts—draw on theoretical work from scholars affiliated with institutions like Carnegie Institution for Science and SRI International. Performance expectations are framed to connect to college entrance expectations set by organizations such as the College Board and workforce standards cited by the National Research Council.

Implementation and Assessment

State and district implementation involves curriculum developers, textbook publishers including McGraw-Hill Education, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, and Pearson Education, professional development providers such as Learning Forward and university extension programs at Teachers College, Columbia University and University of Wisconsin–Madison. Assessment pilots have been conducted in collaboration with consortia and testing agencies like Educational Testing Service, Pearson, and state assessment offices. Implementation also engages nonprofit and philanthropic actors including the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and organizations that support teacher networks such as Teach For America and National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. School districts in Los Angeles Unified School District, Chicago Public Schools, and Miami-Dade County Public Schools have reported varied timelines for professional learning, curriculum adoption, and changes to classroom assessment practices.

Reception and Criticism

Reception has spanned endorsements from scientific societies such as the National Academies Press and American Association for the Advancement of Science to opposition from policy organizations like the Heritage Foundation and political leaders in states including Texas and Oklahoma (state). Criticisms have addressed perceived federal overreach voiced by members of United States Congress, concerns from faith-based groups including Family Research Council, and debates over local control raised by state school boards in Indiana, Missouri, and South Carolina. Scholars publishing in venues associated with Education Week, Science, and Nature have critiqued practical challenges in assessment design, teacher preparation capacities cited by American Educational Research Association, and resource equity issues highlighted by civil rights groups like the NAACP. Supporters counter with endorsements from organizations such as the National Science Teachers Association and workforce advocates in industry groups including the National Association of Manufacturers.

Impact and Influence

The standards influenced curricular resources, teacher credentialing programs at institutions like University of Texas at Austin and Florida State University, and state policy discussions in legislatures such as the New Jersey Legislature and Pennsylvania General Assembly. International observers in ministries of education in United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada have cited aspects of the approach in comparative reviews. Research agendas at centers like the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, WestEd, and National Center for Teacher Residencies examine outcomes linked to student engagement, persistence into STEM majors at universities including Georgia Institute of Technology and Purdue University, and impacts on diversity in fields represented by societies such as the Society for Advancement of Chicanos/Hispanics and Native Americans in Science. The debate over adoption continues to shape relationships among state departments, professional societies, publishers, and advocacy organizations.

Category:Science education standards